The case against former deputy president Jacob Zuma was postponed to October 11 by the Durban Magistrate’s court on Wednesday. He was granted bail of R1 000.
”This case is postponed to October 11, 2005, you are to pay bail of R1 000. The conditions are that witnesses are not to be interfered with directly or indirectly,” Magistrate TS Ngcube said.
Zuma will not have to hand in his passport but will have to inform the prosecution every time he leaves the country.
He faces two charges of corruption.
The court was packed with Zuma supporters and two African National Congress Women’s League members broke into sobs as he entered the court room.
As the judge left the room, people in the public gallery stood up and chanted ”Down with Mbeki in Zulu” and shouted ”Msholozi”, Zuma’s clan name.
Zuma wore a black suit and a red tie and did not say anything or make any contact with his supporters. He was heavily guarded as he entered and left the court while a helicopter circled the court throughout the proceedings.
Judge Hilary Squires of the Durban High Court recently found that a ”generally corrupt” relationship existed between Zuma and friend Schabir Shaik, who acted as his financial adviser.
Shaik was sentenced to an effective 15 years in prison. However he will apply for leave to appeal his sentence on July 26.
Zuma, who was fired by President Thabo Mbeki on June 14, welcomed an announcement by the National Prosecuting Authority a few days later that it would proceed with criminal charges against him.
Earlier, a small group sang and danced outside the court in support of Zuma. The supporters, many of whom have been camping outside the court since Tuesday night, held banners reading Zuma for president, and sang revolutionary songs.
”We are here because we support Mr Zuma. We believe he is innocent until he is proven guilty,” said Dintle Mamonyane, a 20-year old student from Durban.
Jackson Madlala, a 40-year old airport worker said he has been outside the court since 7pm on Tuesday.
”He [Zuma] is a comrade and we will support him even if he is guilty. We will die where he dies,” Madlala said.
The group of people, watched by police officers, had already gathered outside the court on Tuesday night.
A man with a megaphone shouted: ”This is a political trial” to the crowd.
The supporters were being served borewors rolls and juice by a group of vendors who had set up their stalls underneath a little tree.
A policeman on the scene estimated that there were a little more than 100 people.
The provincial secretary for the KwaZulu-Natal branch of the Congress of SA Trade Unions, Zet Luzipho, said there had been a ‘large demand’ for the vigil.
”People want to show their support for Mr Zuma,” he said.
”It is not a Cosatu event or an ANC event, it is open to the public. Those who feel what we feel are welcome to show their support for Mr Zuma.”
In August 2003, the former head of the National Prosecuting Authority, Bulelani Ngcuka, said there was a ”prima facie” case against Zuma, but that it would be impossible to win the case.
Strong supporters of Zuma, including Cosatu, the SA Communist Party (SACP), and some youth wings of political parties, have also called for Zuma to have his day in court, saying he should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Former judge to act as legal adviser
On Monday, the former head of the Special Investigation Unit, former judge Willem Heath, announced that he would act as a legal adviser to Zuma in his trial.
Zuma prevented Heath from being part of an investigation into allegations of corruption regarding the arms acquisition.
Heath said he would not be part of the team representing Zuma in court.
”I agreed to accept a brief as legal counsel to advise him on the merits of the corruption charges which may be brought against him.
”I will not be part of the legal team, which will represent him in any criminal trial which may be brought against him.”
Heath repeated his view that it was ”unfair” and ”may well be prejudicial” that Zuma was not prosecuted concurrently with Shaik.
”Shaik was tried in the absence of Mr Zuma whereas people who were allegedly parties to corruption are usually tried together.
”In the absence of Mr Zuma, Judge [Hilary] Squires… made findings against Zuma which may have been different had they been tried together”.
Heath said numerous statements were made when the NPA decided not to prosecute Zuma.
”Further statements followed during the course of the Shaik trial and many other public statements have been made subsequent to the conviction of Shaik, many of which reflected on Mr Zuma in a prejudicial manner,” he said. – Sapa